About your Search

20130318
20130326
STATION
CNNW 13
MSNBCW 6
CSPAN 2
KQED (PBS) 2
KRON (MyNetworkTV) 2
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 27
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)
on two important cases. the defense of marriage act and california's proposition 8. doma designed emergency as a legal union between a man and a woman and keeps same-sex couples from getting the same benefits as couples. in fact, bill clinton who signed doma into law when he was president, is now asking the u.s. supreme court to overturn it. let's bring in cnn legal contributor powell cowen. how much will the reversal potentially make? >> supreme court justices would tell you they're immune from politicians lobbying them. they're appointed for life by the president, and the founding fathers frankly set up the system so you would have sort of an independent judiciary. i don't think bill clinton's position will have a major impact on the court. >> so what the constitutional argument that will be made to keep doma in place? >> well, there are two cases before the court this week. one on tuesday and one on wednesday. the first on tuesday is called the prop 8 case. california case, and it's very interesting because the california supreme court said gay marriage is legal. they said it's
known as doma, first passed by congress and signed by president clinton in 1996 is being challenged at the supreme court. >> it's being asked to decide there whether or not congress can pass a law that treats same-sex couples who are already married under the laws of their state different from opposite section sex couples. >> reporter: defenders of the law say congress has as much right as the states to make its own definition of marriage. >> doma is important because congress said it was important. i mean we sent our elected representatives to washington, d.c. and they chose to say that marriage is one man and one woman for purposes of federal law. >> reporter: conservatives say the founding fathers never contemplated gay marriage. >> because it's clearly not what anyone understood as marriage at the time of the framing of the constitution. >> reporter: still, same-sex families pay taxes and don't get the same benefits and the issue with doma really gets complicated if they have children who are also excluded from benefits. >> when we have kids i would like them to be born in a pos
's proposition eight. let's start with doma. it's the federal law that defines marriage as a union between and a man and a woman. it keeps gays from get iting th same rights. president clinton signed doma into law in 1996. he now says it should be struck down. avery freedman from cleveland, good to e see you. >> hi, fredricka. >> and richard herman, good to see you as well. avery, you first on this. two cases before the supreme court. let's begin with doma. how much is at stake here? >> i think this is one of the great cases that the the supreme court will hear this term. that and prop eight. but doma which was compromised legislation and signed by bill clinton back in 1996 has always been questionable in terms of constitutionality. and two federal appeals courts have held that that law that restricts personnel rights that is by the federal government violates the constitution. it violates the equal protection law. in terms of the significance of it, it's really march madness. this is so important and so exciting because you have the solicitor general arguing against the constitutionality
at that point because they're hearing arguments on the defense of marriage act. doma denies federal benefits to same-sex couples legally married in their own state. and then friday, all right, car enthusiasts get to new york. the new york auto show kicks off. the nine-day event features about 1,000 vehicles and will, of course, show off hot new cars and trucks from around the world and all the technology that goes in them. >>> we told you about the defensive marriage act up for debate on wednesday. thousands of couples across the country affected by the supreme court decision and cnn joe johns spoke to one of those couples. joe? >> christi, the defensive marriage act has been the law of the land since 1996. though its title may sound harmless enough, gay and lesbian americans all over the country claim the law has caused enormous damage, claiming that marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman. jamel thomas and corinne williams were together four years before they got married last october. don't let the wedding dresses fool you. their lives are not all saturn and pearls. >> i am a
, and then it will make on doma defining marriage as the marriage between a man and a women. a sign of the intense public interest over both cases with be seen outside of the court where lines started forming with people braving the cold as early as last thursday, the supreme court showdown comes as the political ground is shifting. an abc poll shows a record high 58% of americans now support same-sex marriage. today we saw mark warner come out in support of same-sex marriage and joins senator claire mcaskill who announced her support over the weekend. jay rockfeller spent "the war room" a statement saying quote . . . bravo senator. karl rove said that he could imagine a 2016 gop candidate in favor of gay marriage. wow. but will the supreme court's decision bring ground breaking change. joining me to discuss this is our political friend christine pelosi, chair of the california democratic party women's caucus, and she shares the party platform when they adopted marriage equality. what is at steak? >> most immediately at steak are the 18,000 same-sex couples which got married.
of marriage act - or doma - that legally defines marriage as between a man and woman. conservative leader rand paul says he believes in traditional marriage, but not doma. >> "i don't want the government promoting something i don't believe in, but i also don't mind if the government tries to be neutral on the issue." >> reporter: although recent polls show a majority of americans support of same sex marriage, california's attorney general says it's more important to read the constitution. >> "i am absolutely against a ban on same-sex marriages because because they are simply unconstitutional." >> reporter: i'm cristina mutchler reporting for kron 4 news. >> a view from the golden gate. with rainfall, coming up. . [ female announcer ] safeway presents real big deals of the week. or how to get great prices on things you need for easter. we know you look around for the best deals, that's why we give you real big club card deals each week. right now a juicy smoked shank half ham is just 99 cents a pound. let's bake. safeway sugar is $1.97 for four pounds. and chobani greek yogurt is just a buck. r
to be looking ahead to d.o.m.a. and prop 8 and the supreme court is going to be hearing arguments on those cases. some people have said the best thing for the republican party would be four the court to strike down both of those provisions so they don't exactly have to litigate or plant a flag on their opinion regarding gay marriage any more. it's settled law of the land and everybody can forget about this being a divisive issue and move along. what do you make of that? >> well look, there's no question that congress, that passed d.o.m.a., certainly has a responsibility as many there have tried. to repeal d.o.m.a. d.o.m.a. is before the supreme court next week, as is proposition 8, the marriage ban in cal cam. we'll see what the court does on those two. i'm opt michtic on both. at the end of the day, we don't decide the fundamental rights of a minority by the a vote of the people or the whims of public opinion polls. that's with a our judiciary is there for. as we're talking about the new language that you're hearing from chairman raince priebus and the report that came out from the republican p
as the states to make its own definition of marriage. >> doma is important because congress said it was important. i mean we send our elected representatives to washington, d.c. an they chose to say that marriage is one man and one woman for purposes of federal law. >> reporter: and conservatives say the founding fathers never contemplated gay marriage. >> because it is clearly not what anyone understood as marriage at the time of the framing of the constitution. >> reporter: still, same-sex families pay taxes and don't get the same benefits and the issue with doma really gets complicated if they have children who are also excluded from benefits. >> when we have kids i would like them to be born in a post-doma united states. >> reporter: still, california as one of only a handful of states that gives most of the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples and domestic partnerships. one question is whether any ruling by the court on california could affect all of those other states in the same way. pred? >> thanks so much, joe. >>> so is there a feeling that the landscape on gay marr
's proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage. the second case involves the defense of marriage act known as doma. that law defines marriage as between a man and a woman. right now people are lining up outside of the supreme court trying to get front-row seats to history. will the supreme court say i do to same-sex marriage or decide to punt? key players made their arguments today on cnn's "state of the union." >> we immediate to keep the debate live. americans on both sides of the issue are deeply invested on this debate of marriage and don't need a 50-state solution presented by the supreme court when our democratic institutions are perfectly capable of handling the issue. that's what the court will december glide the united states supreme court since the 1880s has 14 times described marriage as a fundmental right. when we are talking about this issue going before the court, we are talking about fundamental notions of people, justice, and liberty. >> >> supreme court's ruling may not come until june but the justices question during argument this week may reveal how they are leaning. bring in no
incomparable in the house. the idea that it drove the adoption of doma -- >> it was an election year and a people do not have the political power to protect themselves. >> i want to ask whether, are there any intermediate positions between striking doma down entirely end up holding? i do not think so. >> you said that there are different cases. they are. statesstion is, do these have the authority to retain the traditional state of marriage? not that they have to. need a? it is the question on both. >> not asking you to yield their position. are there any interim positions in the case that the court could find between on the one hand doing what they suggested, to stay -- say the states have the full power to uphold or to change or do anything was same- sex marriages? and what the strongest view of the challengers is in prop. 8 our calls distinguishes unconstitutional. is a standing argument. >> it would be in a weird way. it would probably mean that there be marriage equality restored in california. >> why? quiet the judgments stays in effect. the that is clear at all. it is more tha
the constitutionality of doma and then after it lost in district court, it decided not to defend the constitutionality, but that a heightened standard of review was applicable, and under that heightened standard of review, it could not pass constitutional muster. when the district court does this in the case before the court now, the house of representatives known as the bipartisan legal advisor regroup entered the case to defend on behalf of the house, claiming that the law was unconstitutional, which meant that the -- that at least there would be an adversary present, which there would be in the court appeals case. in the court appeals by a vote of to do want to buy they struck down the line and the cases now before the court. when the court granted review, it did something quite interesting. although both the house and the solicitor general as well as the plaintiffs all believe there is jurisdiction, the court independently raise the jurors -- the question of whether there's jurisdiction or not ended appointed a harvard law professor to appear as amica as to argue that everybody involved is wrong a
a challenge to the defense of marriage act, or doma. that federal law defines marriage as being one man and one woman. edith windsor of new york is a plaintiff in the doma case. she fought back when she received an inheritance tax bill for $363,000 when her partner of 42 years died in 2009. here's what she told you in an earlier interview. >> new york state accepted my marriage as a marriage. and i believe and the justice department and the president agreed with me that the law doma is unconstitutional. doma is cruel. it discriminates against us for absolutely no value to the country. and we'd like to see that defeated all together. >> joe johns is in washington with more on what's ahead this week. morning, joe. >> morning. these are two of the most important cases of the year for the supreme court. the case involving edith windsor is actually the second case scheduled to be heard this week on wednesday. that challenge to the federal defense of marriage act. this is the law passed by congress and signed by the pld in 1996 that takes away benefits of marriage of same-sex couples on the f
. it will hear arguments for the defense of marriage act known as doma. we discuss the issues before the u.s. supreme court. it's the final stop on a long and winding legal road. let's begin with a look at how it all started. the week of valentine's day, 2004, newly elected san francisco mayor gavin newsom, boldly, some said recklessly orders to grant marriage
clinton, who signed that into law say that d.o.m.a. should be overturned and senator rob portman is citing his familiarity with this issue, his son is gay. how do you think this is going to play out in the 2014 midterms and then subsequently 2016 general election? >> well, alex, we've seen a clear shift in public opinion on this issue over the last ten years. it's been quite dramatic. all sorts of polls now, including the reuter's poll last week shows that the public supports gay marriage even civil unions. even in the south, the majority supports gay marriage or civil unions together. democrats are united on this issue. they say it's a big winner, especially among younger voters, and there's a real sort of active debate within the republican party about how to play this. there's a lot of people saying we've got to stop emphasizing these social issues because they are not working in our favor. however, if you're going to have a divisive 2016 primary, rick santorum is going to want to talk about that and that could really hurt them. >> do you think that will be the case in 2016? if you look
of marriage act, doma. and there are reports of people already lining up outside the court to hear these arguments. and joining me now is the executive director for the foundation for equal rights. thank you for joining me. i want to get a preview of the case that you're going to present to the supreme court next week. >> sure. on tuesday, ted and david are going to go in that courtroom and they're going to make the case that one, 14 times the supreme court has said there's a fundamental right to marry for all americans. two, that denying gay and lesbian couples that right all rights them and hurs their families. and three, allowing gay and lesbian couples access to this right to make that pledge of public commitment through love and marriage hurts no one else. >> it must be buoyed by a group that agreed that children who are raised with gay parents that are married have a much more stable home life for them. but when it comes to whether or not this should be a state versus federal issue, we are seeing governors approach it quite differently. you have colorado's governor hickenloop
not only on prop 8 tomorrow but doma on wednesday. but in the meantime the thoughts of those that have come from far to be a part of this, luckily the media doesn't have to wait in line, we get designated seats. but just to be a part of it, what's it like to be inside those hallowed halls? >> it's funny. you talk to as i have so many of these people whose cases have actually made their way to the supreme court. and that in and of itself is a lot like lightning strike. and then it begins usually very tense as the justices start interrupting the attorneys as they make their arguments. there's always from time to time in these a moment of levity where everybody realizes we're all human. but at the end of the day, yes, it's hugely important. everybody sort of gets caught up in the moment. and then you wait. and we'll certainly be waiting until june at least. >> i think, joe, some of these people standing in line waiting to be the first people to hear clarence thomas ask more than just a very small question, which i know we've already had. but that big first question for justice clarence thomas.
. but what we doma maintain, and think the president is the first do so, is that israel has the rate to independently defend itself against any threat, including the iranian threat. >> i think the only thing i would add is that our intelligence cooperation on this issue, the consultation between our militaries, intelligence, is unprecedented. and there is not a lot of light, a lot of daylight, between our k our countries' assessments in terms of where iran is right now. i think what bb alluded to, which is absolutely correct, is each country has it make its own decisions when it comes to the awesome decision to engage in any kind of military action. and that israel is differently situated than the united states. and i would not expect that the prime minister would make a decision about his country's security and defer that to any other country. any more than the united states would defer our decisions about what was important for our national security. i have shared that with bb, is i said to the entire world, and said to the iranian people and iranian leaders, that i think there is
, will be hearing arguments on two landmark cases. the federal defense of marriage act or doma and proposition 8. so what can next week mean for politicians? mark murray is standing by. so mark, if the court strikes down these laws, do you think that could potentially help politicians in both parties? >> i think you could see more governors, more state legislatures feel like they might have free reign for gay marriage in their states. craig, i will say you're already seeing such a rush on this in states with democratic control. and the change in attitudes has been striking. in our own "wall street journal" poll, 30% of the country supported gay marriage in 2004. that is now a majority. 51%. so a full 20 or more percentage points increase in just nine years. that's amazing in social attitudes and in american politics. >> it kind of reminds me, when roe v. wade happened, a lot of politicians could say this is settled law. so you don't have to spend a great deal of time engaged in debates with a potential political opponent over it. if the court, if it keeps these laws intact, how could that complicate
presentations and health care, and, you know, are the doma cases impacting that at all, do you think, in that outcome? >> i mean, marriaging is a health issue from a foundational perspective inasmuch as i mentioned earlier married people tend to be healthier. you have a caretaker in the home, you have social support, it's probably easier for you to get insurance coverage, to all of that translates to being healthier. so marriage equals health in many cases. but more broadly from the perspective of the lgbt movement is health is foundational. health is what comes fist. it's what you need in order to enjoy the benefits of marriage. it's what you need in order to be able to serve in the military. it's what you need in order to be able to go to work every day and take advantage of protections that we're all fighting for. so health is really the underpinning, the ground on which so many of our other victories or our other goals are built. and so fighting for the ability of lgpt to be healthy, to protect themselves and their families and their communities is really, i think, as i said, the
act. doma making news after former president bill clinton publicly urged the nine justices to overturn the rule he signed into law. now his wife, hillary clinton, is expressing her support for same-sex marriage. >> lbgt americans are our colleagues, our teachers, our soldiers, our friends, our loved ones. and they are full and equal citizens and deserve the rights of citizenship. that includes marriage. >> the clintons are joining prominent politicians on both sides of the aisle, including ohio senator rob portman, a republican who is publicly backing same-sex marriage. but will that political pressure have any impact on the nation's highest court? joining me now is cnn senior legal analyst, jeffrey toobin, and the executive director and founder of go proud, jimmy dealva. thank you both for being with us this morning. >> good morning. >> jimmy, there's a new poll in "the washington post" that shows a surprising 58% of americans support same-sex marriage. that is a sea change from just a few years ago. to what do you attribute that rise? >> i think that all americans are thinking about
prediction about what you think, van, will happen next week with the u.s. supreme court? >> i think that doma will be struck down, and i think kennedy is the decisive player. i think will is right, you won't see a big case, it's legal everywhere, it's done. i would love to see that, but i don't think they will do that. i think it's a narrow decision. >> it will affect two or three states. >> okay. thank you to both of you. van jones and will cain. >> you bet. >>> mystery caper. the case of nancy grace's missing cuff necklace. the prime suspect may be anderson cooper. at od, whatever business you're in, that's the business we're in with premium service like one of the best on-time delivery records and a low claims ratio, we do whatever it takes to make your business our business. od. helping the world keep promises. let's see what you got. rv -- covered. why would you pay for a hotel? i never do. motorcycles -- check. atv. i ride those. do you? no. boat. house. hello, dear. hello. hello. oh! check it -- [ loud r&b on car radio ] i'm going on break! the more you bundle, the more you save. now,
party coming up with a video changing the clinton view on doma and in the republican party, we're hearing from all across the spectrum that regardless of what the supreme court does the party needs to have a more libertarian view on this. republicans are telling us it would be a huge help with fund-raising especially in the big states of new york, california, and florida. if the republican party were to be more open on this. and people are telling us that investors don't want to invest what they think losing national elections which could continue to be the case if republicans stay very narrow on this issue. republicans i talked to even extremely conservative ones, very christian conservative republicans are telling me the polls they have seen in the last couple of weeks have been eye-opening, showing not only that young people very heavily in favor of gay marriage, but if you extrapolate that a little bit in just 10, 20 years, this is going to be 70/30 issue that republicans are going to be quickly going to be on the wrong side of. >> to your point, mike, looking at a graphic.
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)